View
0
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
14-070610-01 Version 1 | Internal Use Only © Ipsos MORI
1
Version 1| Internal Use Only
Southwark CCG
CCG 360o stakeholder survey 2015
Main report
14-070610-01 Version 1 | Internal Use Only © Ipsos MORI
2
Table of contents
Slide 3 Background and objectives
Slide 4 Methodology and technical details
Slide 6 Interpreting the results
Slide 7 Using the results
Slide 9 Summary
Slide 16 Overall engagement and relationships
Slide 27 Domain 1
Slide 37 Domain 2
Slide 55 Domain 3
Slide 81 Domain 4
Slide 93 Domain 5
Slide 111 Domain 6
Slide 130 Local CCG questions
14-070610-01 Version 1 | Internal Use Only © Ipsos MORI
3
Background and objectives
Southwark CCG
Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs) need to have strong relationships with a range of health and
care partners in order to be successful commissioners within the local system. These relationships
provide CCGs with on-going information, advice and knowledge to help them make the best possible
commissioning decisions.
The CCG 360o stakeholder survey is a key part of ensuring these strong relationships are in place.
The survey allows stakeholders to provide feedback on working relationships with CCGs. The results
from the survey will serve two purposes:
1. To provide a wealth of data for CCGs to help with their ongoing organisational development,
enabling them to continue to build strong and productive relationships with stakeholders. The
findings can provide a valuable tool for all CCGs to be able to evaluate their progress and inform
their organisational decisions.
2. To feed into assurance conversations between NHS England sub-regions and CCGs. The survey
will form part of the evidence used to assess whether the stakeholder relationships, forged
during the transition through authorisation, continue to be central to the effective commissioning
of services by CCGs, and in doing so, improve quality and outcomes for patients.
14-070610-01 Version 1 | Internal Use Only © Ipsos MORI
4
Methodology and technical details
Southwark CCG
• It was the responsibility of each CCG to provide the list of
stakeholders to invite to take part in the CCG 360o stakeholder
survey.
• CCGs were provided with a core list of stakeholder organisations
(outlined in the table opposite) to be included in their stakeholder
list. Beyond this however, CCGs had the flexibility to determine
which individual within each organisation was the most appropriate
to nominate.
• They were also given the opportunity to add up to ten additional
stakeholders they wanted to include locally (they are referred to in
this report as ‘Wider stakeholders’). These included:
Commissioning Support Units, Health Education England, lower
tier local authorities, MPs, private providers, Public Health England,
social care / community organisations, Voluntary Sector
Council/Leader, voluntary / third sector organisations, local care
homes, GP out-of-hours providers and other stakeholders and
clinicians.
• The survey was conducted primarily online via email invitations.
Stakeholders who did not respond to the email invitation, and
stakeholders for whom an email address was not provided, were
telephoned by an Ipsos MORI interviewer who encouraged
response and offered the opportunity to complete the survey by
telephone.
Core stakeholder framework
GP member practices One from every
member practice
Health and wellbeing
boards Up to two per HWB
Local HealthWatch One per local
HealthWatch
Other patient groups Up to three
NHS providers – Acute Up to two from each
provider
NHS providers – Mental
health trusts
Up to two from each
provider
NHS providers –
Community health trusts
Up to two from each
provider
Other CCGs Up to five
Upper tier or unitary local
authorities Up to five per LA
14-070610-01 Version 1 | Internal Use Only © Ipsos MORI
5
Methodology and technical details
• Within the survey,
stakeholders were asked a
series of questions about
their working relationship with
the CCG. In addition, to
reflect each core stakeholder
group’s different area of
expertise and knowledge,
they were presented with a
short section of questions
specific to the stakeholder
group they represent.
• Fieldwork was conducted
between 10th March 2015
and 7th April 2015.
• 65 of the CCG’s stakeholders
completed the survey. The
overall response rate was
86% which varied across the
stakeholder groups shown in
the table opposite.
Survey response rates for Southwark CCG
Stakeholder group
Invited to take
part in survey
Completed
survey Response rate
GP member practices 44 35 80%
Health and wellbeing boards 2 1 50%
Local HealthWatch/patient
groups 4 3 75%
NHS providers 6 6 100%
Other CCGs 5 5 100%
Upper tier or unitary local
authorities 5 5 100%
Wider stakeholders 10 10 100%
Southwark CCG
14-070610-01 Version 1 | Internal Use Only © Ipsos MORI
6
Interpreting the results
• For each question, the responses to each answer are presented both as a percentage (%) and
the number of stakeholders giving a certain answer, which are included in brackets (n).
• The number of stakeholders answering (the base size) is stated for each question. The total
number of responses is shown at the bottom of each chart and in every table.
• For questions with fewer than 30 stakeholders answering, we strongly recommend that you look
at the number of stakeholders giving each response rather than the percentage, as the
percentage can be misleading when based on so few stakeholders.
• This report presents the results from Southwark CCG's stakeholder survey. Throughout the
report, ‘the CCG / your CCG’ refers to Southwark CCG.
• Where a result for the ‘cluster’ is presented, this refers to the overall score across the 20 CCGs
that are most similar to the CCG. For more information on the cluster and how this has been
defined, please see Appendix A.
• Where results do not sum to 100%, or where individual responses (e.g. tend to agree; strongly
agree) do not sum to combined responses (e.g. strongly/tend to agree) this is due to rounding.
Southwark CCG
14-070610-01 Version 1 | Internal Use Only © Ipsos MORI
7
Using the results – the reports
Southwark CCG
• This report contains a summary section, a section on overall views of relationships and a
section for each of the six assurance domains which show detailed breakdowns of responses
to each question.
• The overall summary slides show the results at CCG level for the questions asked of all
stakeholders (i.e. only those in section 1 of the questionnaire).
• This provides CCGs with an ‘at a glance’ visual summary of the results for the key
questions, including direction of travel comparisons where appropriate.
• The remainder of the report shows the results for all questions in the survey including any local
questions where CCGs included them. The results for each question are provided at CCG level
with a breakdown also shown for each of the core stakeholder groups where relevant.
• This allows CCGs to interrogate the data in more detail.
• The main report has been structured by the six assurance domains. There is also an additional
initial section on overall engagement and relationships which contains the general questions that
are not linked to specific domains.
• At the end of each section of the main report, there is a table summarising the results, along with
some comparative data for those questions asked of all stakeholders.
14-070610-01 Version 1 | Internal Use Only © Ipsos MORI
8
Using the results – comparisons
Southwark CCG
• For some questions, data has been included in the reports to compare the results for the CCG
with:
• The CCG’s result in 2014
• The 2015 average across all CCGs in the CCG’s cluster
• National CCG average in 2015
• The comparisons are included to provide a rough headline guide only and should be
treated with caution due to the low numbers of respondents and differences in
stakeholder lists.
• Any differences are not necessarily statistically significant differences; a higher score than the
cluster average does not always equate to ‘better’ performance, and a higher scor
